Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    October 10, 2010 12:30am-1:00am PST

1:30 am
yesterday, i saw her wife and many of her friends and i received a letter from her mother and two sisters from olympia, washington. "the family like to see this become a reality. even in the last month of her life, she expressed her desire to be working for the safety of the merchants, the homeless and indigent, and even for the dogs and cats. we have heard testimony from many people have said that she made a difference in their lives. she found jobs, paid for shelter and food and even helped people to straighten out their lives. she saw a need for all of the branches for police work to be actively involved in the city. she had a desire to work
1:31 am
comfortably. her work lives on in the castro to be. the plaza is a fitting and well- deserved tribute and a moral to want to cared so much about people." this was signed by her mother and sisters. thank you. >> any additional discussion? supervisor campos. >> if i may, mr. president, without belaboring the point, i would like to think supervisor dufty for introducing this item. i had the pleasure of working with jane morning during my tenure at the police commission. i have to say that i get to meet someone who was more dedicated to having meaningful community policing not only in the castro
1:32 am
and in the mission but throughout san francisco. i think that this is an important step but also the first that in honoring the chain's memory because there are many issues that she fought for that remain issues today and in a time of limited resources i think at some point, we need to revisit the issue of what the role of a specialist should be and the way in which community policing happens in the inner- city. this is something that cheyne worked very hard towards and unfortunately it was very difficult. i see this as a first that in honoring her many -- from memory. we thank you for your reservist to the city and county of san francisco. >> in 2005 and 2006, it was jane
1:33 am
warner who walked with us in the early part of our system. if you want to look at to the resources, there are very active members which miss warner was possible the most active champions of trying to promote community policing. for that, we will always be grateful. >> unless there is any discussion, can we take this item same house, called? >> item 17 is an ordinance amending the code to change the different categories for the animal care control welfare fund and to authorize the department of animal care and control to accept gifts of cash, equipment, property, and services not to
1:34 am
exceed $50,000. >> same house, same call. >> item 18, resolution responding to presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations of the report entitled "sharing the roadway." >> a house, call. >> item 19. ordinance amending the san francisco planning cut by adding sections 77 to establish 1800 market street community center project special use district. >> the proposed special use district is being established in order to provide for a compatible revenue generating commercial and economic development and use and the portion of the lesbian alliance
1:35 am
and k and transgendered committee center. -- a portion of the lesbian, gay, transgendered, and bi community center. thanks to all of your colleagues here and especially supervisor composts. we established a mortgage guarantee for the center this year that allows the center to stay to $1,000 over the ensuing five years in interest costs. this measure will enable the center to increase our revenue will continuing to serve the community. our goal is to see a restaurant or entertainment use that will increase the number of people coming to the center and the
1:36 am
center itself will determine the best operator for the site in a process that will involve community input. one idea is a restaurant operator to provide work force training and development. -- has pledged to continue and ongoing involvement to help if that is something we are able to do. this measure allows for the center to have an important and needed additional revenue stream that will ensure its financial viability and strength in the years to come. i appreciate everyone's supporting this measure. >> thank you. unless there is additional discussion. let's take a roll call. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye.
1:37 am
>> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> this ordinances passed on the first reading. we have a number of special order items today at 2:33. i would like to ask that we pass over to item 34 and just go through the committee reports for now. >> item 34-36 are considered by the rules committee at a regular meeting on thursday, september 20th, september -- 2010. item 34 confirms the appointment of r. james slaughter to the
1:38 am
police commission. >> a roll-call vote -- actually, supervisor daily - -daly. >> in the time of post reform of the police commission, i know the effort around that charter amendment which it split appointments and also had a focus on getting commissioners who had more involvement with community just this kind of issues, whether this is on the police accountability side or that kind of thing and that was the spirit of it. i'm wondering what mr. slaughter's qualifications are from the kennedy justice perspective. -- community justice
1:39 am
perspective. >> this is an important part of any application. the committee in the end recommended the appointment of this nominee based on a number of things. one of them was based on the questions that were asked and a pretty good understanding of the issues before the committee. one of the concerns i raised was the right before the hearing, there was a report in "the examiner," about the mayor feeling that this would allow the commission to have enough votes to head in a certain direction and this nominee was very clear that he was not going into this appointment with a specific agenda to push a specific set of issues forward. i feel confident and i imagine
1:40 am
that other members of the committee will speak to that as well. and in terms of the social justice peace, even though this nominee is presently an attorney, there has been some involvement fees in the kennedy and we have had the head of legal services for children, he is a member of that board directors and he spoke about his involvement and his work with you. for me, based on the totality of the record that is before us, i feel that i did not have a basis to oppose this nomination and i think that he will do a joke -- a good job on the police commission. i tell know if any every member of the committee has anything to add.
1:41 am
i like to echo the comments of my colleague, supervisor campos, the chairman of the rules committee. i think that mr. slaughter answered questions very sensitively. he had many people speaking on his behalf. what i felt was on honest answer about the efforts to show police and community efforts to make things safer among the immigrant groups. i know that his record was repeated by a number of people in the audits about his long involvement with different social justice issues, in particular supporting children and other efforts. i went into the meeting with some questions but i think that he responded very sensitively so
1:42 am
i'm supportive of his appointment by the mayor. >> i have known mr. slaughter for a number of years and i appreciate my colleagues on the rules committee offering their support and schering was presented at the hearing. i also think about the fact that he has been involved as an attorney in complex issues is important. there's quite a bit of financial fraud taking place in the city. the financial crimes bureau has been short staff for a number of years. i believe that some of his legal experience will enable him to look at the importance of these cases. not a month goes by that i don't hear from a nonprofit that has lost money due to a financial crime and the difficulty of getting those cases pursued.
1:43 am
as someone who is donated a lot of time to the work, i think that he will do an excellent job. >> any additional discussion? a roll-call vote on this nomination. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> no. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. clucks this motion is approved. item 35. -- >> this motion is approved. item 35. >> item 35, the reappointment of
1:44 am
one its board and to the planning board. -- of gweny -- of gwyneth borden to the planning commission. >> roll call vote. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> item 36. >> resolution approving the retention of the office of santa clara county council to advise the city. >> i was a dissenting vote in committee on this item and die
1:45 am
with my to explain why i voted against its parent from the with the city attorney publicly and running for mayor, i find it inappropriate for him to be making the mayoral succession pick in the city attorney's office. i would be comfortable if we did this. the suggestion that came to us in committee is a man who is specifically one person who is very qualified for the position but he did work for the city attorney in the past. there are ties to the san francisco city attorney's office. for the sake of appearances, most importantly, we should be picking someone who has no direct ties to the city attorney himself because this is the job specifically for merrill succession. i will be voting against this not because of any feelings for
1:46 am
the attorney does been chosen or for the santa clara county counsel's office but because i think in this one particular instance, is should be quite frankly beyond question and to know tied to the city attorney's office at all. i am much more comfortable with the two other offices, both of oakland and san mateo county that have directed us to use for these two other issues at hand and i feel much more comfortable with that than i do with this one because this is specifically about mayoral succession. i will be voted against this. >> can they stand so that we can see them? and you. >> -- thank you.
1:47 am
>> any other discussion? can we take a roll-call vote on item 36? >> aye. >> no. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> this resolution is adopted. items 37 and 38 did not come up a committee. why don't we finish with item 39? >> item 39 was considered by the land use and development committee and was recommended as amended with the same title. this is a resolution supporting the efforts of the city of san
1:48 am
francisco america's cup organizing committee to bring the 34th america's cup to the san francisco bay and encouraging bmw, oracle racing, and the golden gate yacht club to select san francisco as the official host city. >> thank you. we had a good meeting. this was a very robust. we had a lot of people there. i would like to thank my colleagues for coming to the meeting with us. the supervisor -- supervisor daily as some very good questions that we had answers for. -- supervisor daly asked some very good questions. it is helpful and good to have a lot of minds looking at this. i would like to thank both of
1:49 am
them for coming and think of the people who came and the work that our cities have has done on this has been remarkable and i think that we are going to come up with a good solid bid. we are not a country, we don't have a king, we don't have a dictator, but we are the people of san francisco and we can do a lot. >> thank-you, supervisor. colleagues. if you're not to book at the land committee hearing. i was there for the first bit of it. i was able to watch the remainder late last night and into this morning, there were many questions that i raised. i know that there has been a great deal of pageantry of
1:50 am
around this city's effort to post the 2013 america's cup but ultimately i think at this point which i think is very important were we either sign-off or don't sign off"-this term sheet -- tha huge decision point, whether or not we move forward, and i think it is the kind of decision point where there is no turning back if things start to move forward. if we approve this, this perhaps is the last vote we get before mr. ellison decides which of the three cities the finalists --
1:51 am
valencia, spain, some city in italy, and san francisco -- it may be the last vote we have on feasibility pursuant to the new language in their resolution. the recently moved to a system of term sheets was so that -- the reason we moved to a system of term sheets was so that we would not go to the project with the only time -- only to reject something a huge amount of force has gone into. legally, there will be the opportunity before the ceqa is
1:52 am
finished -- but let us be honest. if we adopt this term sheet before -- today, before the end of this year we are going to be very hard pressed for the next sitting of this board of supervisors to actually say no to america's cup and the sailing community. we have done more analysis and this actually is not good for san francisco. it is not favorable. therefore we are going to say no, and hopefully you can get something together quick on the fly with valencia to host this thing -- sorry.
1:53 am
let me say there would have to be literally an earthquake in san francisco for that decision to happen. that is probably the only thing that could force six members of this board and/or the mayor of san francisco to 180 degrees change course on this. so this is a very important vote. i know in some arenas it is downplayed. it is just a term sheet and we are still working on it. i am sure that when we talk to the bmw/oracle team, and they say that once the term sheet is done they have this thing taken care of. i think we have to acknowledge there are both of those realities happening at the same time. as the representative of the area where a majority of the activity around the america's cup, including peer at 30 and 32, which will be the locus of
1:54 am
the activity -- piers 30 and 32, and of pure 50, where the entries into the -- and of pier 50 where the entries into the cup will have their staging -- as representatives of 75,000 san franciscans most impacted in terms of what is going to happen in terms of traffic and congestion issues and real things that happen in the real estate market, when thousands of people move here for many years, when 2 million visitors come to san francisco. will there be an economic upside for the regional economy? will it be $1.40 billion? will this be good for san francisco? i am not so sure. when i asked questions about
1:55 am
whether or not this will be good for the san francisco general fund, i think it is becoming increasingly clear that it will not be good for the san francisco general fund and that this event will cost san francisco millions. i am talking about the sense francisco general fund. -- the san francisco general fund. probably tens of millions of dollars. although they assured chair at maxwell there would be written answers to all of my questions yesterday, she sent me this e- mail earlier this afternoon, or sent april on my staff is female. as i mentioned to you on the phone, we do not yet have solid answers to supervisor daly's questions about the impact. i took the liberty to try to make my own spreadsheet. i am trying to figure this out. i have chaired the budget here
1:56 am
for a couple of times, so i know how to use excel. i know how to open it up and put some numbers in. this is my guess for what is going on at our level for this bid. i could be wrong. i have not gotten answers to my questions. in terms of answers and non answers, america's cup has lots of questions and responses. questions were answered by the city attorney as to whether chapter 29 applies. it looks like it does, but perhaps not yet. we will have to make a finding at the board of supervisors before planning decides the ceqa application is complete. i assume that will be coming soon if this application passes. the planned $7 million of
1:57 am
corporate sponsorship, we do not know. the $150 million in the structure they are asking -- is that included in the 270 figure or not? we do not know. will we be recent burst for staff times -- reimbursed for staff times of city employees? we believe it will be another $2 million for taxes and items in the term sheet, which i assumed -- i am not sure what will be included in that $32 million. the staff are not really sure either. what are the costs to the port? we do not know. future infrastructure, financing mechanisms, actual cost for work at pier 80 -- this may or may
1:58 am
not be in the $25 million of infrastructure work. pier 50 -- the cost of accommodating super kyats -- yachts, we do not know. there is an attachment of $890 million. i do not know if that is one year or what. we are not sure on that. the breakdown of the total city costs for america's cup -- we can take a look at that in the budget i prepared. is the city liable for ceqa preparation, yes. the cost of that document? i am not sure. is that $32 billion going to be raised before the 270?
1:59 am
is the city protected first or mr. ellison protected first? do not know. for those of you who follow south beach development policy, you know that is the one that is worth something. it is actually on land. there is that title trust issue. in this term sheet, there is a title and trust swap. what program are we going to put on that? we do not know. what is the value of that parcel? we do not know. piers 30 and 32, when improved or fixed, approximately $45 million. plans to sell any of the parcels -- we do not know.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on